FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to an identity verification device for use with transaction media. More specifically, the system of the present invention eliminates the mechanism used to perpetrate fraudulent and unauthorized use of transaction systems.
The illegal use and receipt of services from a transaction system constitutes a type of criminal offense commonly referred to as transaction fraud. As a national problem, transaction fraud costs consumers, financial institutions, federal, state, and local governments many billions of dollars each year. Eventually, all these costs are passed back to the consumer in the form of higher prices, higher interest rates, and increased taxes.
The principle mechanism used to perpetrate transaction revolves around the use of transaction media. Transaction media are supposed to identify the individual in possession of the media and confirm they have authorization to exchange services from a particular transaction system. Stated another way, transaction media are supposed to answer both parts of the question, "Are you who you say your are and do you have authorization to use this transaction system?".
The appearance of most transaction media will normally exhibit some measure of authority for an individual to use a transaction system. Common forms of transaction media will identify the specific transaction system (e.g. Visa, American Express, etc.), an individual's name, and an account number, at a minimum. By doing so, the appearance of the transaction media will, as a minimum, exhibit an answer to the latter portion of this question.
However, the mere possession of a transaction media will seldom, if ever, exhibit an attribute of personal uniqueness sufficient to confirm the identity of an individual in possession of the media. This leaves the first part of the question unanswered and, in turn, prevents the latter portion of the question to be answered with certainty. The mechanism for perpetrating transaction fraud revolves around this uncertainty in identity verification as demonstrated by transaction media.
A solution to the problem of transaction fraud involves eliminating this mechanism. This requires finding means to verify the individual in possession of a transaction media is, in fact, the same person who has been given authorization to use the media. But, unless the identity verification is also used for enabling the transaction media to interface with a corresponding transaction device, the mechanism for perpetrating transaction fraud will remain intact.
Many innovations from the prior art have suggested methods for solving the problem of transaction fraud. These innovations have included, among others, the use of secret codes, Personal Identification Numbers (PINs), fingerprints, and photographs with transaction media. Some of these solutions have proven to be either too expensive or too cumbersome for implementing on a large scale. Others have simply made the crime of transaction fraud more difficult to perpetrate. Few, if any, have yet to succeed in eliminating the problem altogether.
Secret codes and PIN numbers for one individual, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,995,081, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,879,455, as examples, can be stolen, given away, discovered, bought, or even sold to someone else. In many instances, the PIN or secret code belonging to one individual can be guessed and used by another person having illegally acquired the transaction media belonging to someone else. Consequently, innovations of this sort do not require a linkage between personal uniqueness and identity verification with an authorization to use a transaction system. As a result, secret codes and PIN numbers have not eliminated the mechanism used for perpetrating transaction fraud.
Personal photographs on transaction media, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,687,526, do address the issue of personal uniqueness. However, photographs do not always reflect the current appearance of an individual and can often be altered or exchanged directly on the media itself. Like secret codes and PIN numbers, photographs also do not establish a linkage between identity verification and authorization to use a transaction system, especially in the case of automated transaction systems. Consequently, and although using personal photographs on transaction media may serve to mitigate the crime of transaction fraud, photographs will not eliminate the mechanism used to perpetrate transaction fraud.
Fingerprints are most often regarded as the method of choice for verifying personal identity in conjunction with the use of transaction media. The prior art contains several variations on the theme of using fingerprint identification systems. U.S. Pat. No. 4,636,622, U.S. Pat. No. 4,983,036, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,896,363 are typical examples of such innovations.
Automated fingerprint identification systems, however, are expensive to procure, use, and maintain for large population segments. In addition, consumers are opposed to allowing such personal information as their fingerprints to reside within some non-criminal or non-security related system. This is considered to be an invasion of personal privacy.
Other analysis of innovations from the prior art reveals similar themes toward the inclusion of methods that remain specific to the transaction media but not unique to the individual in possession of the media. Still further analysis of the prior art reveals these innovations neglect to consider the transaction media to transaction device interface. A solution to the problem of transaction fraud must consider not only these deficiencies in the prior art but also a range of other requirements necessary to both eliminate the mechanism used to perpetrate this type of crime and do so in a cost effective manner. A summary of these requirements are as follows:
1. An attribute of personal uniqueness must be used with the transaction media that cannot be duplicated, given away, forgotten, stolen, worn off, tampered with, transferred, or used by any other individual. PA1 2. A solution must control the transaction media to transaction device interface based upon the identity verification process, not upon the action of an individual in possession of the transaction media. PA1 3. A solution must be simple to operate, be accurate, and reliable. PA1 4. A solution must not inconvenience the consumer or portend to be an invasion of the consumer's personal privacy. PA1 5. A solution must be affordable and flexible enough to be used in a variety of transaction media and with a variety of corresponding transaction device and system configurations.
The form, fit, and function of the present invention is designed to meet the requirements stated. Herein also lies the essential differences between innovations from the prior art and the present invention as heretofore described.